obviously graphics aren't everything - nobody is saying they are. But they are a significant part of any game experience and therefore this is a legitimate concern. "Tell this to the Nintendo and the Wii.
DoctorWelch's forum posts
" lol this thread is why i need to get more sleep and stop browsing GB at 4am... "Haha amen to that.
" @DoctorWelch said:Yeah, I wasnt royally boned by it because I played the game on a console, the place that the game was designed to be played on. Anymore, it's a privilege to get a game on the PC not made by Blizzard or Valve. Putting a game on the PC is putting the sale or your game, even on the console, at risk. So the question is, would you rather play it with some DRM that is only a little bit annoying (but not really a big deal because why the hell wouldnt you be connected to the internet anyway except in very rare situations), or not play it at all because it doesnt come out on the PC.@morose said:Spoken like someone who wasn't royally boned by Ubisoft's incompetence on AC2. I'm a consumer, not a pirate, and I can tell you that game was anti-me. I wish I could credibly say I wouldn't be buying anything from them again, but I'm a little bit of a whore. If they put out a good game, I'll probably get it. I'll just be bitter when their service crashes, or when I can't play the game on the train, etc. "" I'm sad to say it, but until Ubisoft realizes that their PC DRM is draconian and anti-consumer, I won't be buying another product from them. I really enjoyed AC 2 on the 360, but there are already more good games out than I can possibly find time to play. Ones that won't kick me out of single player if my net connection is offline. Ones that don't punish legitimate customers. I'll just read about what happens in the story online, for free. I'll spend my $250 of entertainment budget that month on something else. "Also, its not anti-consumer, its anti-piracy. As Jeff has said before, they could either put that DRM in the PC games, or not release them on PC (which they probably would be better off doing anyway). "
I loved Assassins Creed 1 and 2 but I'm feeling a little nervous about this game. With everyone knowing the fate of Ezio and his story, I'm not sure a 15 hour campaign is going to be very compelling. I would probably rather have just the multiplayer (with maybe a tiny amount of single player) for a cheaper price like $40. That is, assuming the multiplayer is good. I really hope this game turns out to be AMAZING, but I have a feeling it will just be mediocre.
" I'm sad to say it, but until Ubisoft realizes that their PC DRM is draconian and anti-consumer, I won't be buying another product from them. I really enjoyed AC 2 on the 360, but there are already more good games out than I can possibly find time to play. Ones that won't kick me out of single player if my net connection is offline. Ones that don't punish legitimate customers. I'll just read about what happens in the story online, for free. I'll spend my $250 of entertainment budget that month on something else. "Also, its not anti-consumer, its anti-piracy. As Jeff has said before, they could either put that DRM in the PC games, or not release them on PC (which they probably would be better off doing anyway).
Two words...FUCK EA.
Edit: As someone who plays sports games and a lot of online shooters, this is a really bad precedent to make. Not everyone has the money to go out and buy a brand new game every time they want to play something. Gamestop obviously makes a killing on their used games, and obviously sell a lot of them. Therefore I wouldnt be surprised if a very very high majority of gamers buy most games used (not to mention all of the games being sold on ebay and amazon). I dont think companies should want to fuck with that many people. This is basically the exact opposite of what companies have been doing to incentivize buying their games new. Instead of trying to reward me for buying their game new they are punishing me for not buying their game new. Why not give me a better reason to buy your game day one, like...make a good game for instance.
All this being said I have decided this isnt as big a deal as it first seems. At first I was furious, but now I calmed down a little :P (although, still, fuck EA) I usually buy the really good games (ME2, MW2, Gears, Halo, Uncharted 2, etc) day one because I really wanna play them as soon as they come out, and I bet a lot of others do to. So it wont be a big deal for those games. Where I see this getting dangerous is if other lesser quality or ever lesser known games start using this method. Think about a new IP like Borderlands. That game was really good and some would say the co-op was key to the experience. Now what if they did the same thing EA is doing because it had somehow become the standard. I think less people would have played that game because of having to buy it new OR not getting the online features when buying it used. Borderlands may not be the perfect example, but you get the point.
In the end I dont think this will really make EA as much money as they think, and I see it possibly become a really bad thing down the road, but we will see.
you=must not have actually played the game
The only thing i can think of that would make you think of that is if you didnt actually play the beta. Stick the ODST disc in and play the beta. Then put the multiplayer disc in and play it. If you still think they are exactly the same your either blind, or partial retarded.
If you dont like the beta thats one thing, I could care less if you like it or not, but its a different story when you give an "opinion" about something you know nothing about. The graphics are better, the gameplay is obviously different, the engine is different, the guns are different, the story will be new, etc. Saying that it could have been a patch is laughably stupid.
Being 19 and saving for college I take advantage of my games still having worth after I'm done playing them. I currently have like 20 NES games along with about 20 N64 games and 10 Gameboy/Advanced games, but those are all games that arent worth much. As for the current generation (I have gamefly), I own 0 PS3 games, and only ME2, MW2, SSFIV, ODST, DJ Hero, and borrowing Lost Odyssey from my cousin. Last summer I would go to Gamestop, buy a used game, beat it in under a week, take it back for full price, and start the process over again with the same $40-$60. I played something like 10-12 games doing that. So yeah, right now it would be pretty irresponsible for me to buy games for no reason and waste money on games I will only beat once. Although, I will say that once I graduate and get an actual job, I will probably do the same thing.
From what I can tell, this is basically a summary of what Astras is thinking:
I dont like the Endurance Run. So I'm going to make a thread stating that the Endurance Run sucks. In this thread I'm not going to give any logical explanations of why I think this, and if I do try to explain it (which will not be frequent), I wont try very hard to think about whether my statements actually make sense. Instead I'm just going to make my posts more and more annoying so more and more people disagree or even get a little mad. (Also, in the processes I will also try to convey my hatred of Japanese games, and anything else I remember I dont like.) Then, when those people try to tell me why my ignorant thoughts might be wrong, I will try to tell them that they are childish or immature for bashing me for my opinions, even if what they are actually trying to do is tell me that the reasons behind my opinion are shaky at best. I will also refuse to listen to anyone with a different opinion then mine because there is no way they can be right about anything. I mean really, whats the point of listening to others when you know your right...right?
I am fairly confident that this summary is as accurate as one can be.
this space is reserved for a witty comment by Astras, or or another pointless comment